<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2004 (4) TMI 554 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162512</link>
    <description>Contravention of the conditions attached to a recognition certificate under section 4-B is assessed at the time of the concessional purchase, and sale of notified goods on consignment basis falls outside the statutory framework for such purchases. Where the certificate conditions are breached, penalty under section 4-B(6) remains attracted, and later payment of tax on the corresponding raw material does not retrospectively cure the breach or alter the character of the earlier concessional purchase. The Tribunal&#039;s view that penalty was displaced by subsequent tax deposit was therefore unsustainable. A limited remand was made only to examine any specific plea that purchases were made from agriculturists without issuance of form III-B, if that plea had in fact been raised.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2014 18:10:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=347593" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (4) TMI 554 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162512</link>
      <description>Contravention of the conditions attached to a recognition certificate under section 4-B is assessed at the time of the concessional purchase, and sale of notified goods on consignment basis falls outside the statutory framework for such purchases. Where the certificate conditions are breached, penalty under section 4-B(6) remains attracted, and later payment of tax on the corresponding raw material does not retrospectively cure the breach or alter the character of the earlier concessional purchase. The Tribunal&#039;s view that penalty was displaced by subsequent tax deposit was therefore unsustainable. A limited remand was made only to examine any specific plea that purchases were made from agriculturists without issuance of form III-B, if that plea had in fact been raised.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162512</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>